Harry Weiss, Inc. v. Moskowitz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Harry Weiss, Inc. v. Moskowitz

128 A.D.3d 444, 6 N.Y.S.3d 482

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 7, 2015

Docket109435/09 15033A 15033

StatusPublished

This text of 128 A.D.3d 444 (Harry Weiss, Inc. v. Moskowitz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Harry Weiss, Inc. v. Moskowitz, 128 A.D.3d 444, 6 N.Y.S.3d 482 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered May 28, 2014, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs’ motion for a directed verdict on their conversion claim and dismissing defendants Mendez Moskowitz and BMW Diamonds, Inc.’s counterclaim for slander, and denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the *445 conversion claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered August 5, 2014, which, upon reargument, adhered to the prior determination, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic.

In his trial testimony, defendant Mendez Moskowitz admitted to the elements of the conversion claim (see CPLR 4401). The spoliation/preclusion order had no bearing on the conversion claim. The counterclaim for slander failed to set forth “the particular words complained of” (see CPLR 3016 [a]).

We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Renwick, Manzanet-Daniels and Clark, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered May 28, 2014, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs’ motion for a directed verdict on their conversion claim and dismissing defendants Mendez Moskowitz and BMW Diamonds, Inc.’s counterclaim for slander, and denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the *445 conversion claim, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered August 5, 2014, which, upon reargument, adhered to the prior determination, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic.

In his trial testimony, defendant Mendez Moskowitz admitted to the elements of the conversion claim (see CPLR 4401). The spoliation/preclusion order had no bearing on the conversion claim. The counterclaim for slander failed to set forth “the particular words complained of” (see CPLR 3016 [a]).

We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Renwick, Manzanet-Daniels and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 A.D.3d 444, 6 N.Y.S.3d 482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harry-weiss-inc-v-moskowitz-nyappdiv-2015.